This is http://www.essayz.com/a9412011.htm         
Previous-Essay      <== This-Essay ==>     Following-Essay
Click HERE on this line to find essays via Your-Key-Words.
{Most frequent wordstarts of each essay will be put here.}
==========================================================
      %PROFESSOR SCHOLAR ANALYSIS SPECIALIZE NARROW+941201
                            %CONTEXTUAL ENVIRONMENT 941201

     Scholars  are  often  fixated upon  analysis  of  the
objects of their attention into their elementary parts  in
efforts  to  understand the whole in terms of  its  parts.
Often to scholars to understand is synonymous with  taking
a whole apart, to see the whole in terms of its parts. The
objects   of   scholar's  attention  are   often   treated
objectively with detachment---in keeping with  the process
of depersonalization and fragmentation which is central to
scholarly analysis.

     Scientific  scholars add to analysis the quantitative
processes of measurement,  enumeration and computation. To
many  scientific scholars a work is not worthy of  respect
and   attention   if   it  is  lacking   in   quantitative
measurements,  enumerations or computations.   This  means
that the quantity and sophistication of graphs,  equations
and  computer  processing is the most important measure of
the value of a bit of scholarly work.

     Scientific  scholars  seek to validate the  value  of
scholarly  work in terms of objective measurements of  its
conformity    to   objective  standards   of   evaluation.
Conformity  to   objective  standards   entails  consensus
regarding merits,  and so there must   be   references  to
respected scholars in  order  to demonstrate that the work
at  hand  fits into  the  pattern  of  conformity  to  the
respected paradigm and  previous  publications.   Thus the
major   criteria  used in evaluation of the  merit  of   a
scholarly work is often how many  references  it  makes to
other scholarly  works,   and how  often  it  is  referred
to  by subsequent scholarly  works.   The relevance of the
scholarship to the human  experiences  of  many people  is
often irrelevant to the process of validating the worth of
a  scholarly work.  The quantity and quality of  scholarly
references  is  regarded   as   the  primary  criteria  in
the process of validation.

     CONTEXTUAL  UNDERSTANDING  is  not  often  a  primary
concern of scholars.   The articulation of how an insight,
perception, vision, dream,  hope, desire, person, work, or
other creature or creation fits into  a larger  whole---is
not as respectable as are attempts to analyze, understand,
predict and  control through fragmentation  of wholes into
perceived elementary parts.    There  is no generally used
single word or word pair to point to  such an  integrative
articulation.    In the absence of a word or phrase  which
points to integrative articulations,  the  word "analysis"
is often  used---with confusing connotations.  We  need to
balance  FRAGMENTIVE  ANALYSIS  with  a  healthy  dose  of
CONTEXTUAL UNDERSTANDING if we  and our communities are to
enjoy   personal  and  communal  integrity.    FRAGMENTIVE
ANALYSIS  is not  the  best or only  way  to  move  toward
personal and communal integrity.

                                                                                                                               
                         (c) 2005 by Paul A. Smith in      
                    (On Being Yourself, Whole and Healthy)  
                                                                                                                               
==========================================================